question for the Government is why we would not want to
get on, correct this error today, and to ensure that
there is no potential cost to
the
ora. Thank you, Madam Speaker. It's my privilege to stand on behalf of
New Zealand First and speak
on the Exclusive Economic Zone
Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill. I'd like to
note my thanks to the Minister,
the Hon David Parker, for his
opening comments about fixing
one of many, many, many mistakes in the original
Act. And this is an error in
legislation somewhat shambolic
legislation. And noting
too the Hon Scott Simpson who mentioned that it
was, in fact, a
minor drafting error, and does not need to be in a
bill of its own right, but
actually we on this side of the House feel
that it must.
I'd also like to acknowledge the
previous speaker for
his training video. To this bill in hand, it
will amend the
amend the Exclusive Economic Zone Act to ensure those that
are applying for notifiable marine
consents pay for the
board of inquiry that
inquiry that considers their
Rather than the taxpayer picking up those costs. So, New Zealand
First believes that this, in fact, is a
very sensible piece
of housekeeping legislation. So, what will
the bill
will amend the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf
Environmental Affects Act 2012, and
enable the Minister to recover
from an applicant the actual and
reasonable costs incurred
in relation to a
board of inquiry, appointed under the Act to
all those reasonable cost that is will be
incurred in relation to
that board of inquiry, appointed under the
Act to decide an application
for marine consent. Now, this change sure
will ensure a process results in a private rather than a public
cost. It's a very narrow scope, this
bill. It relates only to that cost
recovery for marine consents
under section 20. Now, what are
those activities under
section 20. Now, what are those
are construction, placement, alteration, extension, removal,
or demolition of a structure, on or
under the seabed. Maybe it's a
submarine pipeline, on or under the
seabed. The abandonment of
said
It could, in fact, be the removal of that said submarine cable that's on
or under the seabed. The removal of
the seabed or subsoil. The disturbance of the seabed or the
subsoil in a manner that's likely to
have an adverse
effect on the seabed or subsoil.
or subsoil. Also, the deposit of anything
or an organism in or under the seabed,
and the destruction, damage
or disturbance of the seabed or subsoil
in a manner that's likely to have an
adverse effect on marine species or
their habitat. It is a very
important amendment to this piece
of legislation. I'd just like to
take a little pause for a moment
and take our time back to those early days
in the 1800s, the area after the
Napoleonic Wars, and when we had
forest, it was in
hot demand for...
Now, as the Australian colonies grew, they also needed a lot of
timber for their housing,
so when the first Europeans came to New
Zealand, the northern parts of
the North Island, vast
Zealand, the northern parts of the North Island, vast forests,
1,200,000 hectares
1,200,000 hectares of this beautiful, barely now today
4,000 hectares of the original forest
remains. The rest
fell for timber, cleared for farms. Now, legislation
like the EEZ Act, Madam Speaker,
are similarly important for
our natural resources.
similarly important for our natural resources. Obviously,
resources. Obviously, times have changed. And attitudes have
changed towards the natural environment. But
not for some
National Party members. But not for some National
They still hole, in fact, the view that the natural environment is
a resource that must be handed over to
industry at no cost. Take what you
want. Total pillage. You
may remember, in fact, how full
of enthusiasm the National Party was to
gut the RMA. In fact, that tragic
Coalition partner, the dancing
queen for Epsom, wanted the throw
the whole thing out and indull knowledge
the colonial of resources. It
amazes me this company is still existing
today. In 2017 the
National Government made a series of
amendments
Government made a series of Government
amendments to the Resource Management Act and
the Exclusive Economic Zone. Is much
for the revolution
Economic Zone. Is much for the Management
Economic Zone. Is much for the
revolution. Instead what we got was added complexity and costs shifted
to the taxpayer. That's the
crux of this matter. And as we
now know, the main feature of the Key
Government was to transfer as much of
the taxpayer generated wealth as
it could
taxpayer generated wealth as it taxpayer
taxpayer generated wealth as it could from ordinary New Zealanders
up to the big end of
So, the first amendment the Government wants to make to the
Resource Management Act is to
shift those costs back to where
they properly belong
those costs back to where they
taxpayer. So, similarly, taxpayers should not pick up the
bill for marine consents.
should not pick up the bill for
This is why New Zealand First absolutely supports the
Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental
(Environmental Effects) Amendment Bill. It fits
perfectly into our policy.
Bill. It fits perfectly into our
This bill was introduced to ensure that those applying for
these notifiable marine consents pay for
them themselves, rather than
the taxpayer picking up the cost. This
was a National Party mistake due
to the EEZ Act not having cost recovery
provisions for boards of inquiry. It
takes brains and diligence to
sort this stuff out and we're
doing that right now. Not the
eering mentality of the previous Government. That is why this
Government is taking a
painstaking approach to getting it right
and this bill is a
prime example of how the previous Government didn't do
the job properly. Now,
this Government is spending time
fixing it up. New Zealand First
supports the Exclusive Economic Zone and
Continental Shelf (Environmental
Effects) Amendment Bill as being
a very sensible piece of legislation
and we are proud to support
it, correcting a series of legislative
mishaps and appointing towards more
work on the Resource Management Act which will come shortly. I
commend this bill to the house.
all. I call Todd Muller. Seven months, Madam Speaker. Seven
months we've sat in the Environment
select committee reflecting on,
we've sat in the Environment select
which this Government is going to prioritise in terms of
the
there. We've had inquiries on plastic bags, we've had fantastic
plastics in ocean and we reflect every Wednesday,